http://mindhacks.com/2009/02/19/facebook-causes-marble-loss/ Neuroscience and psychology news and views. Mon, 20 May 2013 15:51:40 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ http://mindhacks.com/2009/02/19/facebook-causes-marble-loss/#comment-5982 Mon, 23 Feb 2009 21:16:36 +0000 http://mindhacksblog.wordpress.com/2009/02/19/facebook-causes-marble-loss/#comment-5982 That very awkward feeling you mention in the beginning of your post is an all-too-familiar feeling I get when I watch or read mainstream media report “facts” based loosely upon research studies. I recently touched on this issue in a recent blog post of mine in which a Congressman from California slightly misused research findings to achieve his own means concerning aggression and video games (putting a warning label on video games, similar to a pack of cigarettes). As such, when I found this blog post, I was intrigued to read your opinion on the subject.
Personally, I am glad that you called Aric Sigman’s article “drivel,” as it clearly is nothing more than that. The very idea that the use of social networking sites like Facebook or Twitter could lead to health risks from societal withdrawal is laughable at best. Furthermore, Sigman “cherry-picking” his data is extremely socially irresponsible and potentially morally reprehensible, especially to claim it as truth to news media outlets. From what I have found, the Biologist is a peer-reviewed journal, but what can stop mainstream news outlets from claiming these papers as “the truth?” Does the fault lie with the magazine reviewers, themselves? Furthermore, do you see this as a problematic trend which is getting worse as new mediums technology are studied? What do you suppose is the basis for news outlets being so eager to latch on to and report inconclusive or incorrect findings?
I would draw your attention to a recent blog post by John M. Grohol, PSY.D., called “Can Blogging Make You Happier?” from Psychcentral’s World of Psychology blog, http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2009/02/16/can-blogging-make-you-happier/, where he talks about a Taiwanese study which found that blogging can increase levels of social integration and interconnectivity, and therefore happiness. This study is similar to some of the other studies already posted on your blog, but how do you feel about a study like this, which has no control group, is based solely on self report, and is conducted in a different culture (individualistic vs. collectivistic)? Are studies like this any different—information-wise—from Aric Sigman’s study?
Finally, I would like to thank you for producing such a funny, illuminating response to a major social problem in today’s society. All too often, poor scientific research studies are taken out of context and “swallowed by most mainstream press outlets without question.” It would seem that the only way to combat this is to raise awareness about this problem. I appreciate the work you have done thus far, and I look forward to your response.

]]> http://mindhacks.com/2009/02/19/facebook-causes-marble-loss/#comment-5981 Mon, 23 Feb 2009 21:15:11 +0000 http://mindhacksblog.wordpress.com/2009/02/19/facebook-causes-marble-loss/#comment-5981 That very awkward feeling you mention in the beginning of your post is an all-too-familiar feeling I get when I watch or read mainstream media report “facts” based loosely upon research studies. I recently touched on this issue in a recent blog post of mine in which a Congressman from California slightly misused research findings to achieve his own means concerning aggression and video games (putting a warning label on video games, similar to a pack of cigarettes). As such, when I found this blog post, I was intrigued to read your opinion on the subject.
Personally, I am glad that you called Aric Sigman’s article “drivel,” as it clearly is nothing more than that. The very idea that the use of social networking sites like Facebook or Twitter could lead to health risks from societal withdrawal is laughable at best. Furthermore, Sigman “cherry-picking” his data is extremely socially irresponsible and potentially morally reprehensible, especially to claim it as truth to news media outlets. From what I have found, the Biologist is a peer-reviewed journal, but what can stop mainstream news outlets from claiming these papers as “the truth?” Does the fault lie with the magazine reviewers, themselves? Furthermore, do you see this as a problematic trend which is getting worse as new mediums technology are studied? What do you suppose is the basis for news outlets being so eager to latch on to and report inconclusive or incorrect findings?
I would draw your attention to a recent blog post by John M. Grohol, PSY.D., called “Can Blogging Make You Happier?” from Psychcentral’s World of Psychology blog, http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2009/02/16/can-blogging-make-you-happier/, where he talks about a Taiwanese study which found that blogging can increase levels of social integration and interconnectivity, and therefore happiness. This study is similar to some of the other studies already posted on your blog, but how do you feel about a study like this, which has no control group, is based solely on self report, and is conducted in a different culture (individualistic vs. collectivistic)? Are studies like this any different—information-wise—from Aric Sigman’s study?
Finally, I would like to thank you for producing such a funny, illuminating response to a major social problem in today’s society. All too often, poor scientific research studies are taken out of context and “swallowed by most mainstream press outlets without question.” It would seem that the only way to combat this is to raise awareness about this problem. I appreciate the work you have done thus far, and I look forward to your response.

]]> http://mindhacks.com/2009/02/19/facebook-causes-marble-loss/#comment-5980 Sun, 22 Feb 2009 16:04:40 +0000 http://mindhacksblog.wordpress.com/2009/02/19/facebook-causes-marble-loss/#comment-5980 Ah, yet another news story where they deliberately misinterpret facts to conjure a scare story out of thin air
I heard we humans have evolved to have stronger emotional reactions to negative events than positive events (after all, finding a new source of food is nice for survival, but it’s not as important as NOT falling off a cliff!)
And since news is mostly about giving people shots of emotions… it makes sense they misinterpret anything they can to create scare stories
“Facebook causes cancer.” – that’s just pure gold :p

]]> http://mindhacks.com/2009/02/19/facebook-causes-marble-loss/#comment-5979 Sat, 21 Feb 2009 11:44:42 +0000 http://mindhacksblog.wordpress.com/2009/02/19/facebook-causes-marble-loss/#comment-5979 @conge: as were newspapers after the invention of the printing press. There are recorded complaints of the “sullen silence” in coffee houses, because everyone was reading newspapers rather than talking to each other: http://tinyurl.com/beb6zw. Plus ca change…

]]> http://mindhacks.com/2009/02/19/facebook-causes-marble-loss/#comment-5978 Sat, 21 Feb 2009 02:38:23 +0000 http://mindhacksblog.wordpress.com/2009/02/19/facebook-causes-marble-loss/#comment-5978 I believe radio and TV were blamed for causing loneliness when they were introduced to the general public …

]]> http://mindhacks.com/2009/02/19/facebook-causes-marble-loss/#comment-5977 Fri, 20 Feb 2009 16:16:21 +0000 http://mindhacksblog.wordpress.com/2009/02/19/facebook-causes-marble-loss/#comment-5977 My worsening health is definitely correlated with greater internet use. I have ME (CFS) and I am currently not getting better so I spend more time on the internet as there is not much else that I have the energy to do.
This would fit right in with that article. After all, there’s no need to get caught up in the facts; if there is a correlation you can assert causality either way just as you please. Isn’t that what we’re meant to learn from this?

]]> http://mindhacks.com/2009/02/19/facebook-causes-marble-loss/#comment-5976 Fri, 20 Feb 2009 04:28:43 +0000 http://mindhacksblog.wordpress.com/2009/02/19/facebook-causes-marble-loss/#comment-5976 I live in a large metropolitan area which has very little public transportation. PCs weren’t available until my junior high years, and the internet wasn’t available until my college years. I never had very many “real life” friends, and without the ability to drive/own a car, my social circle dwindled rapidly once I graduated from college. Without the Internet, I would not have the friends I have now, and I wouldn’t have met my husband. As the saying goes, “you get out of it (the Internet) what you put into it”.

]]>